A p5 with an OBX header and VTCS removal works pretty well over stock. Still not too rev happy though.
Got 2 P5's in my stable....both well over 200K, one very close to 300K.
1
2
3
-
Oct. 30, 2011 11:13 a.m. familytruckster Reader
-
Oct. 31, 2011 8:27 a.m. SVTF Reader
B14boy wrote: That's why I started looking to the Protege5. From what I read it's a little lighter and has a shorter wheelbase than the MP3.
I think it is the other way around. The MP3 sedan is lighter than the P5 semi-wagon, and most likely shorter wheelbase, being a standard sedan config. The MP3 almost feels TOO light - I can't imagine the P5 being lighter.
-
Oct. 31, 2011 8:40 a.m. familytruckster Reader
SVTF wrote:
B14boy wrote: That's why I started looking to the Protege5. From what I read it's a little lighter and has a shorter wheelbase than the MP3.
I think it is the other way around. The MP3 sedan is lighter than the P5 semi-wagon, and most likely shorter wheelbase, being a standard sedan config. The MP3 almost feels TOO light - I can't imagine the P5 being lighter.
They use the same springs and shocks, so they have to be really close. Wheelbases are the same, rear overhang past the rear wheels on the P5 is less than the sedan.
-
Oct. 31, 2011 12:52 p.m. Vigo Dork
so what is considered to be the best year for celica gt-s'?
IIRC the first year (2000?) had a slightly higher rev limiter which is very useful for keeping it 'on the cam' whereas the later years' lower limiter meant that you HAD to fall off the cam even if you shifted at the limiter.
Maybe it is easier to move the limiter or lower the engagement point of the vtec-amajigger on later years than it is to shop only for one model year, though.
-
Oct. 31, 2011 2:31 p.m. lnlds New Reader
I believe 2000-2001 are the best years for the gt-s. Later models got gimped with a lower redline, drive-by wire or both. There are some late models with a higher redline but apparently the drive-by wire system detracts from the driving experience.
edit:
googling tells me 2000-2001: are pretty much the same.
2002: Because of all the miss-shifts, the transmission was redesigned with wider shift gates. The ratios and everything stayed the same, the ONLY thing that changed in the tranny was the shift gates.
Also in 2002, the rev limiter was lowered to 7800rpms instead of 8400rpms in the previous years. This was also done to prevent over-rev from mis-shifts.
2003-2004: In 2003, Toyota now uses DBW (drive by wire) in the celica. Instead of there being a throttle cable, the throttle is controlled electronically. The rev limiter is raised back to 8400rpms. The interior also has a minor upgrade.
2005: The 2005 Celica is back with the 7800rpm rev limiter. Everything else remains unchanged. Who would have thought Toyota would let the Celica go out like this?? Drive by wire AND the lower rev limiter
-
Oct. 31, 2011 5:56 p.m. smog7 Dork
I think I'm going to start looking for a 2000-2001 gts.
Doe these cars have any major problems?
-
Oct. 31, 2011 10:57 p.m. Vigo Dork
Thanks for the info InIds, ive got it all straight now.
-
Nov. 1, 2011 9:16 a.m. 92CelicaHalfTrac SuperDork
smog7 wrote:
I think I'm going to start looking for a 2000-2001 gts.
Doe these cars have any major problems?
Not really. The "money shift" is the only real issue.
But you won't be looking at cars that had that problem, because they probably won't be running.
They also make relatively insane amounts of power with bolt ons and a tune.
Intake, header, exhaust, intake manifold, and a PowerFC and you're looking at ~220-230hp TO THE WHEELS. You're hauling balls in something that light with that gearing at that point.
Really, as long as it's a real throttle cable car, the year doesn't matter. You can change redline and lift engagement with the PowerFC i believe.
-
Nov. 3, 2011 10:42 p.m. lnlds New Reader
If you're worried about the money shift issue. I think another option is to buy a 2002 and swap in a 2000-2001 knock sensor and ecu. This way you get a real throttle cable, the 8400 fuel cutoff, and widened shift gates.
-
Nov. 3, 2011 11:05 p.m. EdenPrime Reader
I got to this thread late, but i'd like to say that Celicas handle awesome. Their biggest strength is their great handling-- their biggest weakness is 133lbs of torque.
But one just won the Showroom Stock C NASA races a year or two ago. I was pretty proud. It beat out Integras and Mazda 3s.
-
Nov. 3, 2011 11:44 p.m. pimpm3 Reader
I have owned most of the cars in this discussion, and I keep coming back to the B13. I am not sure why you are having such a hard time finding one for sale there are several nice ones on SR20forum.com. I wouldn't be so concerened about mileage. My current B13 with 270K miles drives much better then the last two that I owned which had low 100k on them. Just find a well maintained one and enjoy it.
Here is a nice B13 with a VE installed for 4900.00. My last VE made 198whp... Much more fun to drive then the two Celica GTS I have owned.
http://www.sr20forum.com/cars-sale/273402-sc-very-clean-no-rust-se-r-strong-ve-c-s...
-
Nov. 4, 2011 12:00 a.m. pimpm3 Reader
As far as comparing to a Focus SVT I have breifly owned a rare 5 door hatch and a 3 door. The b13 feels smaller and more tossable. I will concede that the focus motor made more power but the SR20 is a strong engine that will run for a long time with just oil changes. And more power is $1000 away with a VE which bolts right in.
I also was not a fan of the interior of the focus, it felt kind of "plasticy". The GS-R and the B13 had better interiors IMO.
-
Nov. 4, 2011 12:17 a.m. DaewooOfDeath HalfDork
B14boy wrote:
They handle very well but the engine, well, kind of sucks.Vigo wrote:
huh.. light, post-2000, likes to rev, roughly as quick or quicker than b13 se-r... Celica gt-s?
That's a good one. That should have already been on my list. Not sure on the handling though since I haven't driven one and can't compare.
Very narrow power band way, way up in the rev range. It's sort of like a v-tech, but the gears are far enough apart you fall out of the "v-tech" after each redline shift.
edit I have no idea what they're like modded and the one I drove had an auto.
-
Nov. 4, 2011 12:22 a.m. DaewooOfDeath HalfDork
Bobzilla wrote:
2001 Tiburon. Still small, easy to work on, still able to get power out of them and they are super cheap now.
Yes, very much so. ^ You can make them handle very well and they make about the same power as a mildly modded B13 would stock.
-
Nov. 4, 2011 1:51 a.m. B14boy New Reader
pimpm3 wrote:
I have owned most of the cars in this discussion, and I keep coming back to the B13. I am not sure why you are having such a hard time finding one for sale there are several nice ones on SR20forum.com. I wouldn't be so concerened about mileage. My current B13 with 270K miles drives much better then the last two that I owned which had low 100k on them. Just find a well maintained one and enjoy it.
Here is a nice B13 with a VE installed for 4900.00. My last VE made 198whp... Much more fun to drive then the two Celica GTS I have owned.
http://www.sr20forum.com/cars-sale/273402-sc-very-clean-no-rust-se-r-strong-ve-c-s...
I don't buy cars that aren't within my local vicinity. I wouldn't fly out or roadtrip to a car which might end up being a total piece.
-
Nov. 4, 2011 6:36 a.m. 92CelicaHalfTrac SuperDork
DaewooOfDeath wrote:
B14boy wrote:
They handle very well but the engine, well, kind of sucks.Vigo wrote:
huh.. light, post-2000, likes to rev, roughly as quick or quicker than b13 se-r... Celica gt-s?
That's a good one. That should have already been on my list. Not sure on the handling though since I haven't driven one and can't compare.
Very narrow power band way, way up in the rev range. It's sort of like a v-tech, but the gears are far enough apart you fall out of the "v-tech" after each redline shift.
edit I have no idea what they're like modded and the one I drove had an auto.
Well... an auto would definitely fall out of lift on shifts. Not as many gears.
With a proper transmission it's way easier to stay on the cam.
-
Nov. 4, 2011 2:43 p.m. Merc New Reader
92CelicaHalfTrac wrote:
DaewooOfDeath wrote:
B14boy wrote:
They handle very well but the engine, well, kind of sucks.Vigo wrote:
huh.. light, post-2000, likes to rev, roughly as quick or quicker than b13 se-r... Celica gt-s?
That's a good one. That should have already been on my list. Not sure on the handling though since I haven't driven one and can't compare.
Very narrow power band way, way up in the rev range. It's sort of like a v-tech, but the gears are far enough apart you fall out of the "v-tech" after each redline shift.
edit I have no idea what they're like modded and the one I drove had an auto.
Well... an auto would definitely fall out of lift on shifts. Not as many gears.
With a proper transmission it's way easier to stay on the cam.
That is until you burn a valve lol! Which happens quite a bit and may be the only draw back to this yamaha designed engine.
I also think the gearing is a little too wide for the manual. It also seems like the 6th gear is pretty much a useless gear even at highway speeds. I think its intention at the time was just a marketing gimmick. None the less, I did like it overall as well.
